What about the distribution of wealth in the United States? I've read more than once that 90 percent of the money is owned by 10 percent of our population. That leaves 10 percent to be divided among 90 percent of the people for survival.
``Trickle down' was supposed to help distribute wealth among all of us more equitably, but this has not happened. This policy assumes that the ethics of business leaders are such that profits will be distributed equitably.When was the last time we were all made aware that businesses were, to any major extent, passing on improved profits to people other than owners, stockholders and executives?
Working people get fired to cut costs. When those lower costs improve profits, they don't hire more people or elevate wages. Nor do they reduce prices to benefit consumers.
There is no ``trickle down,' just ``trickle across.' Money is flowing in the same old, flood-ridden stream. Deregulation ensures the position of the streambed.
Delegation to business leaders of the responsibility for the equitable distribution of wealth, without regulation, and with current ethics in place, may ensure more vast numbers of poor, disenfranchised American citizens.
Middle and lower economic classes may soon find themselves in a position similar to the Third World labor group. This is a potential goal of ``trickle down' economics. (Perhaps a hidden agenda).